For those who still don't get it after that slightly cryptic jab, the linked article is bullshit because most of what isn't GUI polish in OS X, including WebKit and BSD, is open source.
So the open source and free software movements created Mac OS X, which also runs the iPhone.
That said, the Apple ecosystem is marketed as if it was embraced by freedom lovers, this doesn't actually reflect the user base.
But you were appealing to faith in the system. Faith in the unprovable assertion that true DRM is impossible is simply naive.
Blu-Ray is crackable because it still has to allow for a mess of hardware issues on the computer side. Straight from player to display with no intervention from other machines, and DRM is quite feasible, at least to the point that ripping will be prohibitively expensive next to simply exploiting the final analog gap.
The system has already failed. The only reason we can backup DVDs is that the technology wasn't there yet. In a few years, they will have hardware DRM integrated into our displays, and the only way to backup our media will be with a network of mics and a video camera.
I own a Motorola Droid, which comes with a hardware H.264 encoder/decoder. I'm pretty pissed that I don't have a corresponding license to view that H.264 on the computer I'm typing this on.
It's clear that conventional delivery mechanisms are inadequate to allow commercial use for anything other than satellites. Until that changes, anything other than commercial satellites should remain in the domain of pure science.
No, assuming he had a share ratio of 100 per song, that number is a good ballpark figure.
Given the nature of the Internet, and how long the defendant was known to be sharing, it's perfectly reasonable to allege that the works were shared with over 100 people each.
If Microsoft wants to claim and enforce a draconian EULA, they're effectively saying that by buying their software there's a contract between you and them, and as part of that contract they agree to provide any updates through the supported life of that product. In most businesses, the contracts are much more explicit.
By making a change like this which requires action on your part to continue receiving updates, they've made a substantial change to the contract, without renegotiating. Such unilateral changes to contracts are normally frowned upon by the courts.
Where is the profit motive? Human space travel, while it does involve engineering, is really pure science of the highest order. All we're doing is asking the question "What will happen if we send a person into space?" and doing it. It's simply too expensive to be a worthwhile commercial endeavor. As such, free enterprise doesn't make sense. It's something that a purely business attitude simply cannot understand.
Now, of course what we're talking about is separating those parts that business can understand and using business for that, but it still just seems wrong. You've got two different people talking totally different languages, one of "How can we do this?" and one of "What if we do this?"
Yeah, I'm a bit of an idealist, but I think the what if people should be holding the keys at the management levels. Someone needs to bring them down to Earth occasionally, but you need people who aren't afraid to waste money if you want to do anything interesting. Are such people in charge at NASA? I don't know, they're probably the same managerial types at the aerospace firms. But I don't see why shifting the managerial focus to commercial enterprise will do anything to advance pure science.
Unless of course your goal is to kill pure science in the aerospace field.
All I meant was that hypothetically, in the unlikely event that that everything around you was tagged, it wouldn't be a total waste to buy a full-fledged computer without a proper data entry mechanism. Yes, it's impractical.
I just remembered I hadn't ran `sudo apt-get upgrade` for a month or two.
Not that there's much danger of me getting hacked, but that's a 100mb download. Just imagine how much crap I'd be downloading if you waited for patch Tuesday!
Sure, but then you're just being paranoid. If you don't trust Facebook with your data, you don't trust Facebook with your data. But this master password doesn't really say anything about their trustworthiness.
Summary is a troll. The password was not plaintext (ok, l33t isn't that much more secure.) Just the same, the summary is a troll because this password only works if you're logged in at Facebook HQ - so basically it's like a database password. There's no real reason to secure this any more zealously than you would a database password, because it's just as secure. If someone's in a position to use the Chuck Norris password, they've already broken Facebook's security, or they are responsible for Facebook in some manner.
Actually, the suit in question was very wise, much more so than the Slashdot headline makes him out to be.
If I had to paraphrase what he said in the article, it would be more along the lines of
Yeah, we've got all sorts of crazy shit in our development labs, but I don't think it's going to go anywhere - well, at least not this year. And even if it does, we're raking in the dough on these netbook things (which we invented by the way) and I don't think that's going to change anytime soon. However, some of this shit is pretty cool, and it will eventually become commonplace.
Twice is an exaggeration. It's a significant change, but not twice.
And storage is cheap, so that's not really the issue here. You only need to back up the masters, so it's really only like 1.5 times the storage, assuming they do very basic backups of the videos on YouTube.
Security is hard. There's no way to secure something if users don't take steps to secure their logins.
Strong passwords strike a tricky balance, and people are perfectly capable of keeping passwords strong. They simply choose not to.
Doing counter-bruteforce work takes a lot of time and resources, and it has a dubious gain, since no one has found a way to do it with 100% effectiveness. Things always slip through the cracks. The best you can do is provide people a doable means of keeping their data secure. The rest is up to them.
If you live in the States. I'm sure they have some place they could use a bit of network help for a week.
Of course, is there really a project you can think of taking on and finishing week?
Yachana Lodge is a nice Eco-lodge in the Ecuadorian Amazon along the Napo River that needed network help the last time I was there - of course they're looking for Spanish speakers, and a little more than a week.
On the other hand, they do need laptops, and Amazon networking is pretty extreme. The jungle eats pretty much any cabling you lay down in a year or less, so they have an all-wireless mesh network with solar and some small-scale (talking bicycle tires with cups on them) hydroelectric power for slow charging.
So if you could come up with a durable, lightweight, very low power (beyond netbook low-power) design for a laptop (solar?) and you wanted to raise money and build some, I bet you could make a trip of going somewhere where they need them and distributing them and teaching basic use. But a week is tricky.
Slashdot Mirror
Google, Firefox, Red Hat...
Hell, when you look at how they choose to implement their software and not marketing/user base, even Microsoft is more free-thinking than Apple.
For those who still don't get it after that slightly cryptic jab, the linked article is bullshit because most of what isn't GUI polish in OS X, including WebKit and BSD, is open source.
So the open source and free software movements created Mac OS X, which also runs the iPhone.
That said, the Apple ecosystem is marketed as if it was embraced by freedom lovers, this doesn't actually reflect the user base.
The truth of p2p is that the majority of users are free riders. If you catch someone seeding, it's very likely they're seeding a lot.
http://iwi.wiwi.hu-berlin.de/~fis/p2pe/paper_F_in_t_Groen.pdf
But you were appealing to faith in the system. Faith in the unprovable assertion that true DRM is impossible is simply naive.
Blu-Ray is crackable because it still has to allow for a mess of hardware issues on the computer side. Straight from player to display with no intervention from other machines, and DRM is quite feasible, at least to the point that ripping will be prohibitively expensive next to simply exploiting the final analog gap.
The system has already failed. The only reason we can backup DVDs is that the technology wasn't there yet. In a few years, they will have hardware DRM integrated into our displays, and the only way to backup our media will be with a network of mics and a video camera.
I own a Motorola Droid, which comes with a hardware H.264 encoder/decoder. I'm pretty pissed that I don't have a corresponding license to view that H.264 on the computer I'm typing this on.
That's why I'm behind Mozilla 100% on this.
It's clear that conventional delivery mechanisms are inadequate to allow commercial use for anything other than satellites. Until that changes, anything other than commercial satellites should remain in the domain of pure science.
No, assuming he had a share ratio of 100 per song, that number is a good ballpark figure.
Given the nature of the Internet, and how long the defendant was known to be sharing, it's perfectly reasonable to allege that the works were shared with over 100 people each.
If Microsoft wants to claim and enforce a draconian EULA, they're effectively saying that by buying their software there's a contract between you and them, and as part of that contract they agree to provide any updates through the supported life of that product. In most businesses, the contracts are much more explicit.
By making a change like this which requires action on your part to continue receiving updates, they've made a substantial change to the contract, without renegotiating. Such unilateral changes to contracts are normally frowned upon by the courts.
Where is the profit motive? Human space travel, while it does involve engineering, is really pure science of the highest order. All we're doing is asking the question "What will happen if we send a person into space?" and doing it. It's simply too expensive to be a worthwhile commercial endeavor. As such, free enterprise doesn't make sense. It's something that a purely business attitude simply cannot understand.
Now, of course what we're talking about is separating those parts that business can understand and using business for that, but it still just seems wrong. You've got two different people talking totally different languages, one of "How can we do this?" and one of "What if we do this?"
Yeah, I'm a bit of an idealist, but I think the what if people should be holding the keys at the management levels. Someone needs to bring them down to Earth occasionally, but you need people who aren't afraid to waste money if you want to do anything interesting. Are such people in charge at NASA? I don't know, they're probably the same managerial types at the aerospace firms. But I don't see why shifting the managerial focus to commercial enterprise will do anything to advance pure science.
Unless of course your goal is to kill pure science in the aerospace field.
I don't think you properly understand the economies of scale involved here.
All I meant was that hypothetically, in the unlikely event that that everything around you was tagged, it wouldn't be a total waste to buy a full-fledged computer without a proper data entry mechanism. Yes, it's impractical.
If that's possible, we will make that mistake regardless of economic system.
I just remembered I hadn't ran `sudo apt-get upgrade` for a month or two.
Not that there's much danger of me getting hacked, but that's a 100mb download. Just imagine how much crap I'd be downloading if you waited for patch Tuesday!
Sure, but then you're just being paranoid. If you don't trust Facebook with your data, you don't trust Facebook with your data. But this master password doesn't really say anything about their trustworthiness.
Summary is a troll. The password was not plaintext (ok, l33t isn't that much more secure.) Just the same, the summary is a troll because this password only works if you're logged in at Facebook HQ - so basically it's like a database password. There's no real reason to secure this any more zealously than you would a database password, because it's just as secure. If someone's in a position to use the Chuck Norris password, they've already broken Facebook's security, or they are responsible for Facebook in some manner.
Firefox has 25% of the browser market. That's not an edge case.
On a tablet? Not gonna happen. Everyone needs to do data entry.
Although I suppose if you embed RFID in everything you could do away with data entry.
Actually, the suit in question was very wise, much more so than the Slashdot headline makes him out to be.
If I had to paraphrase what he said in the article, it would be more along the lines of
you must be mistaken. Apple does not deal in anachronisms.
Twice is an exaggeration. It's a significant change, but not twice.
And storage is cheap, so that's not really the issue here. You only need to back up the masters, so it's really only like 1.5 times the storage, assuming they do very basic backups of the videos on YouTube.
Mozilla cannot legally support H264 without releasing a closed-source version of Firefox.
Security is hard. There's no way to secure something if users don't take steps to secure their logins.
Strong passwords strike a tricky balance, and people are perfectly capable of keeping passwords strong. They simply choose not to.
Doing counter-bruteforce work takes a lot of time and resources, and it has a dubious gain, since no one has found a way to do it with 100% effectiveness. Things always slip through the cracks. The best you can do is provide people a doable means of keeping their data secure. The rest is up to them.
Don't be a dumbass. All that would mean is that lobbyists would then have armed guards.
If you live in the States. I'm sure they have some place they could use a bit of network help for a week.
Of course, is there really a project you can think of taking on and finishing week?
Yachana Lodge is a nice Eco-lodge in the Ecuadorian Amazon along the Napo River that needed network help the last time I was there - of course they're looking for Spanish speakers, and a little more than a week.
On the other hand, they do need laptops, and Amazon networking is pretty extreme. The jungle eats pretty much any cabling you lay down in a year or less, so they have an all-wireless mesh network with solar and some small-scale (talking bicycle tires with cups on them) hydroelectric power for slow charging.
So if you could come up with a durable, lightweight, very low power (beyond netbook low-power) design for a laptop (solar?) and you wanted to raise money and build some, I bet you could make a trip of going somewhere where they need them and distributing them and teaching basic use. But a week is tricky.